Members go professionally silent in effort to negotiate for long-term royalties.

Further Reading

After 18 months of contract negotiations and over 12 months after first voting for strike authority, voice actors in the SAG-AFTRA union will stop working with a number of prominent game companies as of today. The strike is part of an attempt to negotiate a more favorable contract that gives voice actors residual payments on successful games.

As part of last-minute negotiations this week—overseen by a federal mediator—representatives from the affected game companies offered an immediate 9 percent increase in the prevailing wage offered under the contract, speeding up a previous offer of a 3 percent annual raise over three years. The companies also offered additional compensation for games that required multiple recording sessions. Combined, the companies say this would have amounted to a 23 percent or more wage increase for "typical" video game recording sessions.

The union didn't even put that proposed contract to a vote before going on strike at midnight Thursday night. In a statement, the union argued that increased upfront payments don't address their members' primary issue: continuing residuals:

In this industry, which frequently uses performers and understands the intermittent and unpredictable nature of this type of work, fair compensation includes secondary payments when games hit a certain level of success with consumers, not simply higher upfront wages. Secondary compensation is what allows professional performers to feed their families in between jobs.

No matter what these companies are peddling in their press releases, this negotiation is not only about upfront compensation. It is about fairness and the ability of middle-class performers to survive in this industry. These companies are immensely profitable, and successful games—which are the only games this dispute is about—drive that profit.

We have proposed a fair payment structure that enables the sustainability of a professional performer community. These employers have unreasonably refused that. The time has come to end the freeloader model of compensation and that is why our members are united behind this cause.

The affected companies once again assured players that "the majority of upcoming games already in production will be unaffected by any SAG-AFTRA strike due to the nature of the 'No Strike Provisions' of the collective bargaining agreement." In other words, the companies argue, performers that already started work under the old contract are legally prohibited from striking until their current project is finished.

Once current jobs are out of the pipeline, though, some major game publishers will be cut off from the voice acting and motion capture talents of a union that claimed 150,000 active members as of 2014. The affected game companies say that SAG-AFTRA talent "represents performers in less than 25 percent of the video games on the market" and have implied they will be able to get by with non-union talent in the medium term. But the union claims some well-known names among its membership: actors from David Hayter and Jennifer Hale to Phil Lamarr and Wil Wheaton have publicly lent their support to the cause.

Further Reading

The possibility of a strike has caused a bit of a schism between voice actors and some game developers, most of whom are not unionized themselves and do not receive royalties for their programming, design, and artistic work. As Ubisoft Montreal Creative director Alex Hutchinson put it last year, "If @WilWheaton gets royalties on a game before myself or any of the others who spent years (not weeks) working on it, the system is broken."

Wheaton tried to downplay that kind of conflict in a thoughtful blog post explaining the voice actors' position last year.

I can’t speak to the fairness or unfairness of residuals or lack of residuals for programmers, artists, composers, and others who game developers and publishers, because that’s not my job, and I don’t know what, precisely, their contracts are. I certainly don’t believe that there is some sort of feud or lack of shared interest between us (the actors) and them, and I fully support all the people who work on games—especially the huge blockbuster games that pull in profits that are in line with the biggest blockbuster movies—getting the very best contract, with the best compensation and best working conditions that they possibly can.

While the affected companies say they "look forward to working with the performers and SAG-AFTRA to continue to explore ways to further enhance the working environment," they also warned against a strike that "will immediately and directly take money out of their members’ pockets."

SAG-AFTRA members will form a picket line outside of Electronic Arts' Playa Vista offices later this morning.

Latest Ars Video >

War Stories | Thief: The Dark Project

1998's Thief: The Dark Project was a pioneer for the stealth genre, utilizing light and shadow as essential gameplay mechanics. The very thing that Thief became so well-known for was also the game's biggest development hurdle. Looking Glass Studios founder Paul Neurath recounts the difficulties creating Thief: The Dark Project, and how its AI systems had to be completely rewritten years into development.

War Stories | Thief: The Dark Project

War Stories | Thief: The Dark Project

1998's Thief: The Dark Project was a pioneer for the stealth genre, utilizing light and shadow as essential gameplay mechanics. The very thing that Thief became so well-known for was also the game's biggest development hurdle. Looking Glass Studios founder Paul Neurath recounts the difficulties creating Thief: The Dark Project, and how its AI systems had to be completely rewritten years into development.

Kyle Orland
Kyle is the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica, specializing in video game hardware and software. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He is based in the Washington, DC area. Emailkyle.orland@arstechnica.com//Twitter@KyleOrl

I remember the good old days when voice in video games first started. The game devs themselves would do the voice acting, and man did it show. Kings Quest V sticks out particularly far in my memory.

They made up for it with Kings Quest VI.

Now there's a remake I would love to see...just high res art and graphics. That's all that needs fixing. The voice acting was perfect!

I don't recall, but that might have been the first time they used professional level voice acting. Good game. Space Quest 4's latex babes of Estros scene was another I remember as particularly laughable, but at least SQ4 had the professional narrator.

An important thing to remember with them asking for royalties. They're contract workers, meaning they get hired to do a week's worth of recording before their contract is up. That means they get a one payment for that week and it's possible that they'll go a month or two without getting any additional work if they're not top talent. The royalties would provide them with residual income over time to help cover themselves from those slow periods.

Are the voice actors going to accept a smaller upfront payment against the prospects of future residuals ?

No they are not, they did not even consider that offer before going on strike.

Quote:

To me it sounds more like good old fashioned greed at play here.

All the voice actors do is turn up, and talk into a mic.It's not as if they do design/layout, coding/programming etc.

Have you seen a professional voice actor work before? What they do is magic, bringing characters to life. Granted what they do is not greater than 'design/layout, coding/programming', but it is no lesser.

Quote:

Where does it end ? Who won't be eligible for residuals ?The cleaners ? The security guards who go around in the middle of the night rattling the locks ?

For some AAA games, the voice actors somewhat sell the game, so it makes sense they get royalties like Hollywood productions do. If a particular game has Jennifer Hale or Tara Strong voicing the main character, then I am 70% more likely to buy it

An important thing to remember with them asking for royalties. They're contract workers, meaning they get hired to do a week's worth of recording before their contract is up. That means they get a one payment for that week and it's possible that they'll go a month or two without getting any additional work if they're not top talent. The royalties would provide them with residual income over time to help cover themselves from those slow periods.

Find another job, do something else. Nobody should "force" and industry to pay them residuals. This is a perfect example of the kind of stuff that gives unions bad names to many people.

Same thing with actors in movies BTW. I don't want to unnecessarily focus on voice actors and how good or bad their work is.

SAG-AFTRA's demands have always seemed perfectly reasonable to me. Their ask on residuals is surprisingly small. The fact that these companies refuse to work with a perfectly reasonable set of demands just goes to show you how used to exploiting their labor publishers are.

Gaming development employees desperately need to unionize and fix their labor situation the same way SAG-AFTRA is trying to fix the situation for voice actors.

"If you’re in a position in any job, no matter what the job is — if you’re driving a milk truck or installing TVs or an upholsterer for a couch — if you’re in a position to get a raise and you don’t get it, you’re stupid."Matt LeBlanc

An important thing to remember with them asking for royalties. They're contract workers, meaning they get hired to do a week's worth of recording before their contract is up. That means they get a one payment for that week and it's possible that they'll go a month or two without getting any additional work if they're not top talent. The royalties would provide them with residual income over time to help cover themselves from those slow periods.

Find another job, do something else. Nobody should "force" and industry to pay them residuals. This is a perfect example of the kind of stuff that gives unions bad names to many people.

Nobody is forcing anything, this is just negotiation. As has already been pointed out, good voice work makes a big difference in game experience.

An important thing to remember with them asking for royalties. They're contract workers, meaning they get hired to do a week's worth of recording before their contract is up. That means they get a one payment for that week and it's possible that they'll go a month or two without getting any additional work if they're not top talent. The royalties would provide them with residual income over time to help cover themselves from those slow periods.

Find another job, do something else. Nobody should "force" and industry to pay them residuals. This is a perfect example of the kind of stuff that gives unions bad names to many people.

An important thing to remember with them asking for royalties. They're contract workers, meaning they get hired to do a week's worth of recording before their contract is up. That means they get a one payment for that week and it's possible that they'll go a month or two without getting any additional work if they're not top talent. The royalties would provide them with residual income over time to help cover themselves from those slow periods.

To the voice artists I say "Poor little diddums"

If they want the certainty of a regular income, then get a job that pays every week.

What is it about "artistes" that they all moan and complain about how hard done by they are. Don't like the unreliability of irregular work as a voice artist or actor etc ? Then change profession and stop moaning.

A voice actor is talented, sure, but there is absolutely no way in hell they should get residuals if game devs themselves that work 80 hour weeks for a year or more don't get them.

If that means we use non unionized voice actors instead of Jennifer Hale, so be it.

Performance bonus targets? Sure.

Just because dev's have terrible contracts and need to unionize to get residuals doesn't mean that other industries that deal with video games shouldn't get proper compensation. One group of labor being exploited doesn't mean another group of labor should be too. They aren't connected, voice actors should get residuals and development should get residuals. They both deserve it. One just has a union to fight for its rights and the other doesn't.

Are the voice actors going to accept a smaller upfront payment against the prospects of future residuals ?

To me it sounds more like good old fashioned greed at play here.

All the voice actors do is turn up, and talk into a mic.It's not as if they do design/layout, coding/programming etc.

Where does it end ? Who won't be eligible for residuals ?The cleaners ? The security guards who go around in the middle of the night rattling the locks ?

Saying that what they do is just "turn up, and talk into a mic" is simplicistic, like saying that a writer "writes words on a computer" or an artist "colors pixels". A lot of study, pratice and effort goes into that talking, as with every job.

That said, I am a game developer and I am of course fiercely opposed to them getting residuals. Voice acting is just one of the parts that make a game, and not even in the top 3 most important ones. If everybody would start asking a piece of the pie, no game would ever get made.

I wonder if this means the next year of Hearthstone expansions will begin later in 2017 than planned. The last expansion of 2016 should be unaffected, but I don't know how early they do voice work in the process.

An important thing to remember with them asking for royalties. They're contract workers, meaning they get hired to do a week's worth of recording before their contract is up. That means they get a one payment for that week and it's possible that they'll go a month or two without getting any additional work if they're not top talent. The royalties would provide them with residual income over time to help cover themselves from those slow periods.

Find another job, do something else. Nobody should "force" and industry to pay them residuals. This is a perfect example of the kind of stuff that gives unions bad names to many people.

Nobody is forcing anything, this is just negotiation. As has already been pointed out, good voice work makes a big difference in game experience.

Good voice work can make a critical reception difference to a game. They do not contribute in any significant way to sales. And don't confuse well-educated gamers like those posting on Ars with the 95% of the gaming purchasers that don't even know who Jennifer Hale is.

A voice actor is talented, sure, but there is absolutely no way in hell they should get residuals if game devs themselves that work 80 hour weeks for a year or more don't get them.

If that means we use non unionized voice actors instead of Jennifer Hale, so be it.

Performance bonus targets? Sure.

So, because devs have allowed themselves to be taken advantage of by the companies, that means voice actors should do so as well? In my opinion, devs should absolutely get residuals since the assets and code they create are very often reused elsewhere in some fashion - either whole cloth or as the foundation/starting point for something else.

Just because dev's have terrible contracts and need to unionize to get residuals doesn't meant that other industries that deal with video games shouldn't get proper compensation. One group of labor being exploited doesn't mean another group of labor should be too. They aren't connected, voice actors should get residuals and development should get residuals. They both deserve it. One just has a union to fight for its rights and the other doesn't.

Exploited? While we're throwing around random words that don't apply in this situation how about "oppressed?"

The correct comparison is pay to each one of them compared to the monster pile of cash the game company makes. If the game company is making 10000x the money as the people doing the work then the workers do have leverage for negotiation.

An important thing to remember with them asking for royalties. They're contract workers, meaning they get hired to do a week's worth of recording before their contract is up. That means they get a one payment for that week and it's possible that they'll go a month or two without getting any additional work if they're not top talent. The royalties would provide them with residual income over time to help cover themselves from those slow periods.

That may have been the case but these days alot of them also do full body and face mocap for cutscenes.

Although there is one major point brought up that kind of makes me think twice and that's the fact that the people who created the game get no residual profits.

The problem here is while alot of us enjoy stories in games there are far more people who are just as happy to skip every cutscene and play so for most people the voice work isn't important at all.

Really who deserves residual payment? Why does a voice over actor get them but the person who created the ai doesn't or the artists don't or the people who wrote the music don't etc etc. Where is that line?

If they started paying everyone residuals you can bet games will be $80 pretty quick.

It's amazing they have held at $60 for all these years especially considering inflation and the massive rise in cost to make a game. The only reason they haven't gone up is dlc and micro transactions etc but this would be a good excuse to start driving up the base price and once a single company does it they will all start to do it.

An important thing to remember with them asking for royalties. They're contract workers, meaning they get hired to do a week's worth of recording before their contract is up. That means they get a one payment for that week and it's possible that they'll go a month or two without getting any additional work if they're not top talent. The royalties would provide them with residual income over time to help cover themselves from those slow periods.

All freelance jobs are like this. As an adult, you may decide what you prefer: a job that gives you a fixed monthly income, or something more high-risk/high-reward. Why should other people make up for shortcomings of their choice?

Just because dev's have terrible contracts and need to unionize to get residuals doesn't meant that other industries that deal with video games shouldn't get proper compensation. One group of labor being exploited doesn't mean another group of labor should be too. They aren't connected, voice actors should get residuals and development should get residuals. They both deserve it. One just has a union to fight for its rights and the other doesn't.

Exploited? While we're throwing around random words that don't apply in this situation how about "oppressed?"

Crunch culture without proper compensation, lack of residuals, unpaid overtime, fired and shutdown at the drop of a hat, credit for work done denied, divorces, etc... Game dev's passion for gaming is absolutely exploited by publishers. Just read some of the horror stories that AAA devs have published or the EA spouse lawsuit if you want legally demonstrated exploitation in the games industry.

A voice actor is talented, sure, but there is absolutely no way in hell they should get residuals if game devs themselves that work 80 hour weeks for a year or more don't get them.

If that means we use non unionized voice actors instead of Jennifer Hale, so be it.

Performance bonus targets? Sure.

So, because devs have allowed themselves to be taken advantage of by the companies, that means voice actors should do so as well? In my opinion, devs should absolutely get residuals since the assets and code they create are very often reused elsewhere in some fashion - either whole cloth or as the foundation/starting point for something else.

I'm simply placing a significantly higher value on the developers than on the voice actors. If either side is unhappy with the current arrangement they are free to walk. Giving into the union here would be a slap in the face to everyone who works significantly more on the project.

There are thousands of jobs that people do every day that contribute long term value to a company, and those people do not get residuals. Even in sales positions, residuals are never an item.

Take the raise and push for "hazard pay" or whatnot, but give up on residuals.

An important thing to remember with them asking for royalties. They're contract workers, meaning they get hired to do a week's worth of recording before their contract is up. That means they get a one payment for that week and it's possible that they'll go a month or two without getting any additional work if they're not top talent. The royalties would provide them with residual income over time to help cover themselves from those slow periods.

All freelance jobs are like this. As an adult, you may decide what you prefer: a job that gives you a fixed monthly income, or something more high-risk/high-reward. Why should other people make up for shortcomings of their choice?

Considering that more and more work is heading freelancing/contracting it may not be a whole lot longer before that fixed monthly income is a thing of the past.

Are the voice actors going to accept a smaller upfront payment against the prospects of future residuals ?

To me it sounds more like good old fashioned greed at play here.

All the voice actors do is turn up, and talk into a mic.It's not as if they do design/layout, coding/programming etc.

Where does it end ? Who won't be eligible for residuals ?The cleaners ? The security guards who go around in the middle of the night rattling the locks ?

That's a very Trump argument there. Does the security guard or cleaning person contribute materially to the success and image of a game? SAG isn't saying that designers and programmers don't deserve royalties they are just saying that for top games the performers do. If the designers and programmers want the same treatment they should give collective bargaining a try.

As a voice actor (albeit not one who does a lot of video games) I will say there is a lot more to the work and the profession then you understand. Part of the job is to make it look easy and invisible. That doesn't mean it is.

Another aspect of the strike that isn't mentioned here, but is in other Ars articles is the concept of stunt-pay for vocally-stressful roles

From another Ars article:-----SAG-AFTRA is also seeking additional "stunt pay" for performances that are "vocally stressful" and to have stunt coordinators available when motion capture or movement is involved in the recording. The union wants to have some basic information about game projects before accepting an audition; publishers often keep this information under wraps out of fear of leaks.-----

I absolutely agree that the idea of vocally-stressful roles requires some additional compensation. Take the role of Gollum from LotR. Andy Serkis brought that role to life both vocally and with his motion-capture. But that was also very vocally stressful. Look at games like Call of Duty that have a lot of incidental vocal lines in combat - like screams, shouts, grunts. To make those realistic is very vocally stressful. If you don't think so, try doing so for about 10 minutes non-stop. I've done non-commercial audio-dramas that were very vocally stressful - where about 15 minutes of air-time took me about 4 hours to record due to the stress on by voice. And that 4 hours includes multiple takes of the same line because you just can't have the same scream over and over again. There are different kinds of screams, or grunts, or moans, or shouts.

It takes training to do those kinds of voices, but it also takes time to recover. And that information is necessary to know when you go into an audition.

Royalties are a touchy subject. On the one hand, they're the reason we've got this 'forever and a day' copyright system growing. On the other hand, I can see where the voice actors are coming from. You can compare them to devs, but most devs work for a big company. They'll get paid if the game does well, if it flops and most critically, after the game is made. Layoffs after a game is produced isn't considered acceptable practice, though it does occasionally happen.

Voice actors don't have any of that security. On the one hand, that means that they should demand higher wages. On the other, higher upfront wages means that nobody hires competent voice actors. Royalties do seem to split that difference. If you get a hit game or two under your belt you're pretty secure - and let's be honest, good voice acting absolutely helps sales. Would Mass Effect have done half as well if it had bethesda levels of voice acting? I doubt it.

Unions are nothing but poison when they become a monopoly. They make life miserable to the companies that dare hire non-unionized labor and to those who try to make a living without paying an union fee..

The horror of workers using the only tool they have left to demand a fair shake from the company.

And having everyone in the union is the point. If you don't have everyone, you don't have a union. And if a union won your wages and benefits, why wouldn't you pay a union fee? If you like exploiting people, go work in management.